whom judgment would be given if no more evidence were adduced” Generally in civil matters, proof is based on the preponderance of evidence adduced at the trial see the cases of Odutola V. Aiyeleru (1985) 1 NWLR (pt. 11) 92 and Osuji V. Ekeocha (2009) 16 NWLR (pt. 7166) 8. Further section 134 Evidence Act. In the instant case, the burden of prove lies on the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff in his amended pleading asserts that the four (4) shops situate at EFAB Shopping Mall Garki – Abuja belongs to him. By asserting as he did, the burdens on the Plaintiff are as I see it are as follows:1. That he had an agreement to purchase four (4) shops from the 1st Defendant at EFAB Shopping Mall Garki – Abuja. 2. That the price per unit of the shops is N7, 500,000.00k (Seven Million, Five Hundred Thousand Naira). 3. That he paid to the 1st Defendant a total sum of N29, 400,000.00k (Twenty Nine Million, Four Hundred Thousand Naira) leaving a balance of N600, 000.00k (Six Hundred Thousand Naira) towards purchasing the shops. 4. That he paid for the shops in his name. 5. That the 1st Defendant has refused to give him the shops he paid for. 6. That he has made a demand on the 1st Defendant to give him the shops or refund his money and the 1st Defendant has refused. It is only when the Plaintiff has cross these hurdles that the burden of proof in the instant case will shift to the Defendants. It is to be noted that the Plaintiff must rely on his case and give cogent and compelling evidence in support of his pleadings to enable him get judgment in his favour. This is so because the Plaintiff cannot rely on the weakness of the defence to prove his case. See the cases of Okedare V. Adebara (1994) 6 NWLR 17